This invention relates to a smoking article, such as a cigarette, using a paper wrapper with a novel construction. Specifically, the smoking article of the invention uses wrappers which alter the characteristics of the smoking article including puff count, tar delivery and carbon monoxide delivery by adjustment of the paper wrapper's calcium carbonate filler level and of the paper wrapper's basis weight. These adjustments of the paper wrapper combined with changes in filter, paper porosity, burn control additive, or tobacco blend characteristics can be used to design specific smoking articles.
Cigarette paper has traditionally been used in the cigarette industry to control a number of properties of the completed cigarette including puff count, mainstream tar delivery and mainstream carbon monoxide delivery. In virtually all cases, however, changes to the cigarette paper have been restricted to two properties of the paper: paper porosity and level of burn control additive. The relationship of porosity to cigarette performance is well understood by the industry. For instance, as inherent paper porosity is increased, puff count and, therefore, total tar delivery, decrease. Tar per puff remains approximately constant. If, however, paper porosity is increased through perforation of the paper (increase in paper permeability), then puff count increases and tar per puff decreases due to air dilution during the puff.
Paper porosity also has an effect on mainstream carbon monoxide delivery. As porosity increases, mainstream carbon monoxide declines due to increased diffusion through the paper during smoking.
Level of burn control additive is also used to control tar and puff count. Increasing burn control additive over the range typically used (0.5% to 3.0%), increases burn rate, lowers puff count and decreases total tar delivery.
In all cases, these changes in the specifications of paper properties can be combined with changes in the specifications of filter properties to obtain a change in the final design of the cigarette. For instance, should one choose to increase the tar per puff, and therefore the subjective impact of a low delivery cigarette, without changing the total tar delivery, one can increase paper porosity (or level of burn control additive) to decrease puff count and then decrease filter efficiency or filter dilution in order to restore the total tar delivery to its former value. By the same token, if one desires to increase puff count and leave the total delivery constant, then one can decrease paper porosity (or level of burn control additive) to increase puff count, and then increase filter efficiency or dilution to lower the tar per puff. There are many examples known to the art where these types of paper porosity, burn control additive level and filter manipulations are carried out in order to achieve a desired cigarette design.
Despite the flexibility which can be achieved in cigarette design through the manipulation of paper porosity and level of burn control additive, there are instances when a desired cigarette design cannot be optimally achieved by controlling either of these two paper properties. Many examples are in the area of low delivery cigarettes; however, there are certain examples in the category of full flavor cigarettes as well. An example of a cigarette which cannot be achieved using normal practices would be an ultra low delivery cigarette (2 mg tar for a 100 mm cigarette) with reasonable taste characteristics. The puff count necessary to achieve this objective is about 7. Even with paper of essentially maximum porosity (46-50 Coresta units), and a high level of burn control additive, it is not possible to obtain less than 7.5 puffs.
Furthermore, controlling a cigarette's properties by the addition of burn control additives creates unwanted effects. High levels of burn control additive have been shown to increase the tendency of an ash to flake. High levels of burn control additive or changing paper porosity or filter ventilation may also produce an undesired decrease in the subjective impact of the smoking article including less taste. The subjective impact is also often sacrificed if a low tar delivery cigarette is designed with a tobacco blend to lower the tar delivery.
Thus, it would be desirable to provide a smoking article with a paper wrapper that can be used to achieve a smoking article with a desired puff count.
It would also be desirable to provide a smoking article with a paper wrapper that can be used to achieve a smoking article with a desired tar delivery.
It would further be desirable to provide a smoking article with a paper wrapper that can be used to achieve a smoking article with a desired carbon monoxide delivery.
It would further be desirable to provide a smoking article with a paper wrapper that can be used to achieve a smoking article with certain desired characteristics that does not require high levels of burn control additive, changes in tobacco blend, changes in paper porosity or changes in filtration ventilation or efficiency.
It would further be desirable to provide a smoking article with a paper wrapper that can be used to achieve a smoking article with certain desired characteristics without excessively decreasing the subjective impact, such as taste, of the smoking article.